Page 1 of 19 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 190

Thread: Resignation fromCommittee

  1. #1
    Fellhound
    Guest

    Resignation fromCommittee

    I have today resigned from the FRA Committee. The events leading to this have been mentioned on Facebook, as well as on this forum.

    My issue originally started with concerns over the FRA’s approach to safety; as the only safety professional on the committee I somewhat naively thought the FRA would be interested in ideas I had for modernising and improving the current ‘one size fits all strategy’, which is heavily prescriptive and rules-based, and which I and others believe are could place race organisers in legal jeopardy.

    The Safety Requirements document has been gradually modified bit by bit but it has been like pulling teeth and there has never been an acceptance that the whole thing needs to be scrapped and replaced with something simpler, more modern, more flexible and which would ultimately result in safer, better-organised races and would massively reduce the legal risks to ROs in the event of something going wrong.

    The stubbornness of part of the committee was disappointing but that was merely a frustration. Far worse was the lengths which were gone to in attempts to gag me, including meeting minutes which were ‘economical with the truth’, the rejection of a perfectly reasonable motion, the closure of a lively forum thread with little or no justification, and repeated attempts to prevent wider debate on the subject. A post on Facebook supporting Mike Bate (alwaysinjured), who was as ever staunchly broadcasting ‘the message’ then resulted in me being threatened with ‘disciplinary proceedings’, though what the charge would be was never made clear, and this seemed to quietly come to nothing.

    The final straw was the announcement placed on the website yesterday. This continues the party line (that everything is basically OK) and we don’t need to “meddle” with anything and repeats the same fallacious and misleading statements about legal advice having been taken etc. It is attributed to “The Committee” even though I have never and could never approve it.

    As a professional Safety Advisor I simply could not let my name be associated with it. Hence my resignation.

    My resignation letter is reproduced below for members’ information.

    There are elements within the committee who understand the issue and who have concerns. There are even some who fully support the approach favoured by me and others. There are also around 100 people who have considered the proposals of Mike Bate and myself and have given it the thumbs up. This number will surely grow as more and more people become aware of the alternative and of how much better it is for everybody.

    It is my hope that increasing weight of opinion will eventually make the more stubborn elements of the committee wake up and smell the coffee…

    Resignation letter:

    Nick

    I regret to inform you that I am resigning from committee with immediate effect.

    It is my view that the committee and executive have behaved irresponsibly, in drafting of rules, in interacting with Coroner, in hiding evidence, in failing to properly review the inquest, and in refusing to heed competent advice. All of these and more. And, as the recent announcement states that no immediate steps will be taken to rectify any of those matters I cannot and will not support it and cannot allow my name to be associated with it.

    As a safety advisor with personal and professional codes to follow I cannot allow my name to be associated with the current FRA policy on safety, which I believe is faulty and potentially dangerous, especially when I have openly said I disagree. Inconvenience or matters of personal pride should never be knowingly allowed to override matters of safety yet this is what the Committee is currently allowing to happen.

    The executive has allowed important documentation to contain and continue to contain basic errors of understanding, yet still refuses to take offers of competent help, or even allow such matters to be discussed or voted, and still broadcasts the message that everything is OK, instead of recognising there is a problem that needs action.

    These matters are so serious I will continue to oppose them, where I am not obliged to compromise my professional ethics.

    Before the above can be rectified, the FRA must admit there is a problem, and it should be honest with the membership and especially ROs about that. Lamentably, there is no sign of any such admission.

    That being so I resign.

    Sincerely

    Andy Walmsley

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Leeds. Capital of Gods Own.
    Posts
    11,176
    Thanks Andy for putting some of the rank and file in the picture on what's going on.

    The committee does not come out of this look very good the more that the truth comes out.

  3. #3
    Master Dave_Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    the Moon
    Posts
    1,287
    what a terrible shame you feel you had to take this step. Thanks for sharing this and being so honest about the issues.
    ....it's all downhill from here.

  4. #4
    Master L.F.F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Leicester
    Posts
    1,895
    Depressing reading. Seem to be thinking that a lot when I look at the forum these days...
    Josh Hubbard - Ambleside AC

  5. #5
    Moderator noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Western Peak District
    Posts
    6,230
    It's a shame it's come to this. Let's hope this prompts the FRA to move forward on the issues, and not merely close ranks.

    From my ill-informed position reading all this, it sounds like there must be conflicting interests at play.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Knightrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wits' End
    Posts
    260
    This clears a lot of the fog Fellhound, thanks. To adopt a navigation analogy, the path choice from here is becoming obvious ... a rocky road inviting a lot of injury, or a bit of collaboration and find the way together.

  7. #7
    Senior Member wynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Paps of Shap
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by noel View Post
    It's a shame it's come to this. Let's hope this prompts the FRA to move forward on the issues, and not merely close ranks.

    From my ill-informed position reading all this, it sounds like there must be conflicting interests at play.
    Look at the statement on the front page -" After the inquest the precise wording of the new ‘rules’ had to comply with the Coroner’s requirements, and also with the advice given by our lawyer, who also acts for the insurance company." surely this is a conflict of interest - how can the insurance lawyer have the interests of RO's at heart.
    When all else fails and your soul needs a lift - head to the hills

  8. #8
    alwaysinjured
    Guest
    A shame, but not unexpected. You fought the good fight and thanks for supporting me.
    In your position I would have done the same.


    Quote Bertrand Russel..
    "There is no nonsense so arrant that it cannot be made the creed of the vast majority by adequate governmental action"
    Last edited by alwaysinjured; 15-01-2014 at 07:09 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member nippersmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by wynn View Post
    Look at the statement on the front page -" After the inquest the precise wording of the new ‘rules’ had to comply with the Coroner’s requirements, and also with the advice given by our lawyer, who also acts for the insurance company." surely this is a conflict of interest - how can the insurance lawyer have the interests of RO's at heart.
    Wouldn't the insurance company instruct the solicitor to defend a claim in the event of a claim against a RO who was covered by insurance arranged through the FRA.

    The RO could in theory be sued by (a) a member of the public who is injured or suffers loss as a result of a collision with a fell runner in the race (b) by a runner who becomes injured in the race or (c) by the relatives of the fell runner in the event of a death.

    Surely it is in the interests of the insurance company to ensure that ROs are trained and compliant with best safety practice?

    So that both runners and third parties unrelated with the event (eg the walker who gets knocked over and suffers a fracture) are kept as safe as possible in the circumstances?

    Sports law is complex, it would be interesting to know the name of the lawyer advising the FRA. Some lawyers are better than others.

    It is good see that someone has taken steps to show their public support for Always Injured as he often refers in his posts to people supporting him who don't wish to do so in public for a variety of reasons.

    It is difficult to pull all the various strands together and work out the nature of the problem which has compelled Always Injured to continue to type long and detailed posts; many allegations have been made - some serious - together with references to the "Gang of Three" and I have not seen, I could have missed it, any direct response to these allegations.

    If the Committee by their statement put on the home page yesterday, acknowledge that there should be changes to the current rules, "the suite of documentation still needs work" then doesn't it make sense to get working on the required changes, in the interests of safety?
    a rush and a push and the land is ours

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    small green places
    Posts
    171
    What is the matter with the FRA Committee? How have they allowed themselves to get into this mess? Qualified advice and great experience in the world of safety management has been freely offered and as far as I know is still available but apparently has been largely ignored. Race Organisers have been sold the notion that all is well - but it isn't. I won't repeat the numerous examples of deficiencies in the current FRA safety documentation because others have done it so well and seemingly have been banging their heads on the wall over this for what seems like an eternity but to no avail. It's all a bl**dy shame.
    Colin Ardron

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •